Laufer v. Conservation Commission’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

52 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The fact that the possibility exists that two inconsistent conclusions may be drawn from the evidence does not prevent an administrative agency's finding from being supported by substantial evidence. . . . An administrative agency is not required to believe any witness, even an expert, nor is it required to use any of the evidence presented to it in a particular manner."”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rockville Fish Club v. Tolland Inland, No. Cv 92 0049360 S (Jun. 10, 1993) · Six Six One M. Tpk. v. Planning Zoning, No. Cv96 61220 S (May 18, 1999)

2. “[w]hile the agency may seek advice and assistance from a professional staff, it is the agency itself that must find the facts and apply the statutory criteria to those facts”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 8016 - Derham v. Ellington Planning Zoning, No. Cv 95 59400 S (Jul. 30, 1997) · 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 5646 - Wysocki v. Ellington Inland Wetlands, No. Cv-00-0073541s (May 3, 2002)

3. “It is the burden of the plaintiff challenging the administrative action to establish that the record does not support the action of the agency.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 5758 - Fromer v. Reynolds Metals Development Corp., No. 51 41 51 (Jul. 15, 1991) · 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 6943 - Charter Dev. Corp. v. Clinton Inland Wetland, No. Cv00-92049 (May 30, 2002)